There has been talk about selling links, ad-sense site, content thieves etc. And I have made some comments myself about them. in short this is short of a poll to see were you stand on what you think is ethical and unethical.

My feelings not really in any order

Unethical

1. Stealing content or whole pages.
2. Stealing titles and/or descriptions.
3. Hot linking to other sites without approval.
4. Submitting other peoples web site to search engines or anywhere for that matter.
5. People of power on forums or any other type of site with their personal URL in there sig SOLELY for advertising and back links to there own site.
6. Having other people dictate to me how I can or can not make money from my own site. "as long as it is legal"
7. pop ups or adverts of pron on any site without a adult content warning first.
8. Trap pages "any page that once your on, you can not hit the back button to leave. it just reloads that page"
9. Using other pages like forums, blogs, Usenet etc to spam your url. "if that is the ONLY reason your there, joined, or post"
10. knowingly promoting anything illegal.

please post yours

Hey, all is fair in love and war!

Actually just kidding I largely agree with you. I'm just curious how is submitting a site other than your own unethical? How can it hurt another website? If you're posting negative comments about your competition, particularly with no basis for the claim, then you're correct, that would be unethical.

I know that you noted content copying, but the one that annoys me the most in that category is picture lifting.

__________________

Great thread, nice follow up, thanks!

• Not disclosing the risks of any questionable action (such as selling or buying links and risking Google's wrath) to clients. See the thread, Is Link Selling Unethical or Just Unwise? particularly bruceclay's post which puts forth the "do no harm" precept of ethics.
• Any sort of dishonesty.

That's my two cents for the moment ...

__________________
M.-J. Taylor
SEO Web Design by Cyber Key Search Smart Design® SEO Copywriter & Traveling Vacation Gypsy

Hijacking a domain's backlinks by changing topic.

A customer from the pharmacy industry found this website ranked #1 on live for certain popular pharmacy keywords. It seemed fishy as it was a blog with some pharmacy spam content. After checking backlinks, the website showed listed in various important directories like yahoo, in religious furnishings related categories.

If you check this, you'll see that the website was in fact not pharmacy related from 1998 until 2007 when it expired and then somebody purchased it and posted pharmacy content there:
http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.wcpageantry.com

__________________
Dating Software, Web Video Chat Software, Matchmaking Software w. VideoChat.

Here is a article on that topic
How to buy expired domains listed in Yahoo & Dmoz : Internet & Online

There are still a lot of people out there that buy these sites, mostly to put money generating links, ad-sense, ppc, or affiliates.

I was told this once a while ago "The fastest way to get a #1 ranked site is to buy one"
Not sure if that stills holds true or if that is something you want to do but it is something to think about.

What I was aiming at was doing anything to anyones else's site with the intention of doing harm.

But what would happen if someone submitted your site every day to some search engines? "Rule of thumb is once every 30 days". I have also heard war stories as to where someone emailed an editor of DMOZ complaining about their site not being updated or something like that everyday till the site was removed, only to find out it was not their site. Not sure if the last one is really true for it was being talking about on IRC. I point the DMOZ out due to the fact it is a dog eat dog world and it is hard to imagine how low people will go to get what they want. This includes, and I'm more then likely dating myself, email bombing, pub hacking, registering a domainnameSUCKS.com. Well you get my point.

Unethical is doing something you wouldn't appreciate having done to yourself.

Unethical is being inconsiderate. Cheating and trying to take advantage of loopholes.

Ethical means you know what ethical is without having to ask stupid questions.

That is what ethical is.

If you found an error on your competitors page, would you tell them? Most wouldn't, but you would want people to tell you.

Inconsiderate, hmm not sure bout that one. Cheating - never a good idea, taking advantage of loopholes - No not a good idea but too many webmasters feel if I do not do it, someone else will

Not real sure what your getting at here. How many threads do you see everyday "not just here" people talking about is it right or wrong to buy/sell links, ad-sense sites, mirror sites, internal links "site to site", stuffing the title, etc. so stupid questions... is there such a thing?

I was trying to get cut and dry stands on what people think and I'm getting alot of gray.

Ethical and morals go hand and hand and in this world there is a lack of morals. It seems nobody wants to take a stand, put their feelings "this is what I feel" and stand by it. People do have a right to do that. And other people have the right to agree or disagree and that is cool. You seem to be taking this not in a web context, but more of a personal context.
In short I guess it is only unethical if you get caught.

I used to know the answer to this one. Sadly, the words "moral" and "ethical" have come to mean "expedient - but don't get caught or you're a crook". If a company or individual claims to be ethical, it's usually a pretty good indicator that they're not.

"This is what I feel" has seldom anything at all to do with either morals or ethics. If it did, membership of organizations such as the klan would be acceptable. It's not.

DMOZ editors are usually smarter than that. They may be slow to act, but when they do, they *generally* investigate thoroughly.

I like that ... the Golden Rule is always in order. Thanks!

I'm of the mind that there are no stupid questions. Sometimes it is very hard to see the forest for the trees. Our discussion of whether it's ethical to sell links helped me to see where it is unethical and where it's not.

We can always learn something new, even going over old ideas. It's always possible to see things in a new light.

__________________
M.-J. Taylor
SEO Web Design by Cyber Key Search Smart Design® SEO Copywriter & Traveling Vacation Gypsy

If I was a crook, I wouldn't appreciate being caught, or informed on. Your definition would make cops and neighborhood watches unethical, right ?

I have the same attitude toward those that claim to be "Good Christians" or "Good insert religious belief here".. Generally needing to proclaim your innocence is a cover for not being quite so innocent.. Every time I've been screwed in business for "real money" has been by someone claiming how "good" they are..

As for business decisions, I tend to take those on more of a case by case, risk/reward, basis.. Theft?? Not likely.. Taking advantage of a weakness in someone's business model?? Much more likely..

__________________
Steve : Animal Charms Animal Jewelry | Fishing Blog
I'm smelling a whole lot of if coming off of this plan.

Unethical and illegal are two different things. Unethical business practices usually involve underhanded tricks or sneaky doings that might only be questionable and not exactly illegal.

__________________
Marcie Wolf
AlphaGeek Web Design | MarcieWolf.com

True. And no one suggested they were the same... though the original poster did say knowing promoting something illegal is unethical ...

__________________
M.-J. Taylor
SEO Web Design by Cyber Key Search Smart Design® SEO Copywriter & Traveling Vacation Gypsy

Ethical? Moral? Legal?

There's one line more clearly defind than the others but even that one is open for interpretation. And even then, where it may be crossed (or not) is open for even more interpretation.

There are so many variables, how can one "draw the line" and where?

Self preservation comes to mind.

Dave

__________________
Religious-Jewelry Blog - Deep Link Directory - Religious Jewelry

And there are situations in which the morals and ethics of laws may be called into question. For instance, the law which forbids the medicinal use of cannabis. Better to force people to live in pain, or become criminals, than to change a law which appears to have no logical foundation ? Strange that medicinal use of morphine is okay.

Then there is the case of Lord Haw-Haw, a WW2 broadcaster of German propaganda. After the war he was charged with treason, found guilty by a British court, and executed, despite the fact that he wasn't a British national (which was a prerequisite for treason against Britain, according to the law then in force). Following his execution the law was changed retroactively, to make his execution legal.

More from Britain ? The anti-pirate (offshore radio broadcasting) law which made it illegal to broadcast from places where British law doesn't apply. Try to work out the logic, or ethics, of that one.

No. Law and ethics are worlds apart, and morality plays no part.

Ethics has nothing to do with life anymore. People are becoming hard up in this society and when you are in need you will do what you otherwise wouldn'.

Others are unethical because simply of greed. Doesn't matter who you hurt as long as you get ahead -- unfortunately they have learned this attitude by watching and being part of governments and corporations who will do anything to anyone for a buck -- espcially if there aren't many consequences to face and it is highly unlikely you will get caught.

Stealing - is just plain lack of pride. I can't understand how anyone could get caught putting their own name on someone else's work and not just die of embarrassment. This type of scum are going to burn themselves out as people get tired of copycat material. They deserve to burn out though - let the people who engage themselves in creating fresh material and ideas survive and the heck with them.

As far as hijacking a domain - if that isn't worth jail time, it should be.

Would you tell a competitor about mistakes? I went further than that once. I gave him a list of links on his site that were not working - we are now friends and have cooperation between us. I went the other way though - instead of fighting competitors, I built them a resource that everyone can join in and be noted. More than one way to skin a cat.

I would like to thank everyone who has put their input into this thread. And I would like to point out 1 reason I posted it. I just received an email from another SEO site and I'm not going to mention them for I also know a lot of people here have received this same email.

In this email is an article that reads, and I'm only going to point out two of them that really bother me.

10 Key Content Strategies to Increase Online Visibility
By Lani and Allen Voivod (c) 2007

1. BLOG COMMENTS

Go out of your way to read other people's blogs. Your Mother always told you that reading is good for you. She was right! But, when you do so, be sure to productively interact with those bloggers. It makes them feel good. It validates what they're writing about. It starts up a relationship between the two of you. AND, here's the best part, it gives you an inbound link to your site.

4. PARTICIPATE ON INDUSTRY FORUMS

Similar to blog comments and trackbacks, participating on industry forums will get you hooked up with other like-minded professionals, keep you abreast of current trends, and you get to build your own inbound links in the signature line of your posts.

Now I'm the only one that sees this as unethical and unprofessional? This is from a very well know site telling people to go out and just post really anything, but make sure you have a sig file that points to your site. No wonder we have so much spam and people only commenting one time, maybe saying 5 words and never responding again. I like to go on record and say I really respect the admin of this site and what they are trying to do. But I really wonder how many would leave if you could not have a sig file? I would also love it if they went through and looked at peoples past posts and seen how much one really tried to help "compared to just saying "nice job" and have a sig file 4 miles long". If I came on this site and post a totally spam ad, I'm sure it would get deleted " Now I ask you what is the difference from me posting a spam ad or just saying "nice job", other than last one will not get deleted but it is still spam because the only reason that person is here is to promote their own web site.

People come to this site for a few reasons.
1 to get help / advice
2 to give help / advice
3 to spam their own site

now you may be asking if I feel the sig file should be gotten rid of and the answer is no. This is only due to no one is going to help or advise anyone for free, everyone wants something. But it falls on the admin of the site to figure out who is here to help first and promote their site second. And I also feel that if the only reason that one person joins a Blog, Forum or any site is to post short one liners, then yes that person is a spammer and should be removed from that site.

MikMik stated Well would you like it if people post short one liners just to get backlinks in their file? In a way is this not a loophole in the system?

Is this method of getting backlinks sneaky and underhanded?

Now I'm NOT saying MikMik or MarcieZoob was doing this or they are not outstanding members and I'm not trying to offend anyone, I just quoted them to help back up my point, and yes I agree with them.

Ethics has EVERYTHING to do with life. Your statement is disappointing to say the least. I'm no Pollyanna and perhaps millions feel as you do but they're the reason why ethics are more important today than ever before.

If everyone exercised ethical conduct, there'd be no need for Google and the other SE's to program their algos to spot or ask users to report unethical attempts to manipulate results.

Desperate times, hard up or not, ethical conduct is essential. We're not talking about stealing a loaf of bread here, this is business.

Users are not stupid. Scam them into visiting your site and you'll pay for it in the end. Provide useful content, relevant to their query and you'll reap the rewards. Run rampant through the search engines causing untold damage to your competitor's reputation and you'll pay for it eventually, be it through legal means or in a bad reputation. Word gets around quickly these days.

From a business perspective, ask yourself how you want to be perceived among your competitors. Do you want them all to swear under their breath every time they see your spammy link or do you want them to emulate your professionalism and success and respect you as a leader in your niche?

Consider that if someone copies your work, you must be doing something right.

As Incrediblehelp says, "be the best and a link is what you'll get!".

__________________
.
Printer ink & toner cartridges in Canada | Web Payroll, online HR tools, time & attendance

You misunderstood -- I thoroughly agree with you - ethics are extremely important and everyone should have an extremely strict standard of ethics in which they believe and adhere to in all situations. This is how I believe and this is how I live.

I was making the comment because that is how many people see transactions now - they feel that no holds are barred as long as they get something. Here in America I am astounded every day by someone's lack of moral fiber and their weak little justifications for their lack of principles. As far as I am concerned, these types of abstract ideals are what separate us from animals and if someone can't build a solid ethical code - get off the planet - and I mean that very literally. I would just as soon see that type of person vanish from the face of the earth for good. We might even be able to save this place if they did so.

What is very sad is as the population increases, for reasons of both sociology and biology, we are going to see even a further decrease in moral standards. That's what happens when you turn your species into a virus, though.

That might be a harsher answer than you expected - but it's a purely honest one.

Ethical = What I do.
Unethical = what other people do.

Many years ago, someone sold me something. It turned out to be not what they had claimed. It was totally useless. I pointed this out to him and told him I would not be paying him for it and I asked him to take it away.

He refused. He told me that, despite the fact that it was the wrong item, that he felt he desereved payment. He said: "It is the principal of the thing."

I said: "Hang on! The principal of the thing is that you tried to cheat me!"

Eventually he got the point and stopped bothering me. The item ended up being taken to the council tip.

He thought it was ethical to try to cheat me. He thought it unethical of me to object to this.

__________________
http://thatsnews.blogspot.com http://thats-business.blogspot.com/ http://thatschristmas.blogspot.com

Nope. Ethical is what society decides. If you have something to hide, that is unethical.

If you steal to feed your starving kids, that is unethical, but morally?

Morals are personal, ethics are societal. Ethicsmay be based on morals, but morals transcend ethics.
One can know nothing of giving aught that is worthy to give unless one also knows how to take.

Read Kant and Russel and Kohlberg.
Henry Ellis


To say the least: the way in which such goods as friendship, pleasure, virtue, honor and wealth fit together as a whole.
I remember about three years ago arguing with 'business types' about spamming. Unethical, try to convince them, although it is. Immoral? Depends on the reason.

Very well put.

This is something to think about. When I posted this thread I was trying to get people to state in black and white what they though was or was not ethical. From reading this thread and others like it I have come to the conclusion that what I was asking is impossible to receive. ones upbringing gives them their morals and their morals gives them their ethics but what drives that person gives them feeling. If money drives you then you would not care if it was ethical or not as long as you made a buck, If family drives you then yes one would not care if stealing is unethical as long as his family is feed. I have also come to the conclusion that people with the same drive tend to have the same feelings and ethics. So in short it is impossible to reply to that question is because your answer would only hold true for that second in time For the next second in time something could happen and change your feelings and your outlook on those ethics would no longer matter.

I frequently remove "thank you" posts - or at least PM the member and ask them to be sure they are adding something of value or asking a sincere question when posting next time.

When you see this sort of behavior, or any other type of spam, please report the post. Thanks ...

__________________
M.-J. Taylor
SEO Web Design by Cyber Key Search Smart Design® SEO Copywriter & Traveling Vacation Gypsy

Perhaps this belongs in a different thread as it asks a question vs. providing direction. Just the same, it is relevant and timely so here it goes...

I have a client that has decided to move in a direction that is contrary to what we used to both agree was immoral & and maybe unethical. While I wouldn't presume to know all of the motives behind the decision, the stated motive was basically, "Money left on the table" in this client's market and therefore a "must" for future service offerings.

The client has shared that they love my work but they're already moving toward a new developer if I can't play ball under these new rules.

I am prepared to stand up for my beliefs and forfeit the client, the backlinks and exposure - no questions.

What I am not prepared to do is forfeit my Design and SEO and let a new developer come in and put by-lines on my hard work.

So the question then becomes, "Has anyone here had a similar experience that would be willing to offer some insight as to how I might succesfully communicate these truths to this client?"

Thanks in Advance,
Dave

__________________
David Williams
www.DavidWilliams.Biz
Professional Web Design - Affordable Web Solutions

I'm not sure you've given enough information to help with a discussion.. Money left on the table is a long and time honored method of sales.. You charge what the market will bear.. If you charge $50 and the customer would have paid $75 you just lost $25 in profit.. The key to resolving the issue is to continue to increase the price until the customer walks.. Then lower the price slightly..

It's just capitalism.. And nothing "immoral" about it at all..

As for walking away, what does your contract say??

__________________
Steve : Animal Charms Animal Jewelry | Fishing Blog
I'm smelling a whole lot of if coming off of this plan.

I think that is one of the most immoral pieces of self-justification I have ever heard. Morally, you charge what the product is actually worth, NOT as much as you can hold them to ransom for. Who ever suggested that capitalism was about morality ? (I'll bet it was a capitalist - or kgun on the "Norwegian gas" thread - which is probably the same thing).

Uh, a product is only "worth" what someone will pay for it.. eBay is the most obvious example of that in the world today..

Of course this is also an example in the difference in culture that happens when you have people from around the world discussing things that are very cultural..

__________________
Steve : Animal Charms Animal Jewelry | Fishing Blog
I'm smelling a whole lot of if coming off of this plan.

Yeah, that sounds right. If I don't agree with you, it proves that I don't understand. Well, one of us doesn't, and it can't be you, can it ? It's cultural.

I don't have a problem with capitalism, but I strongly object when over-charging is labeled "moral". It isn't. It's extortion. A product is usually "worth" a great deal less than someone is forced to pay for it. Look at the price of gas where you live. Do you really believe it's "worth" that much, or are you being shafted ?

Like I said, cultural differences.. I never said you were wrong, or didn't understand, all I said was that we disagree and I think the cultural differences between where I grew up and where you grew up probably play a very large part of that..

I see absolutely nothing wrong for charging any price that both the seller and buyer agree on, no matter what that price is.. It would be awful hard to justify auctions, or the collectible markets if all we were allowed to charge was some person's definition of over-charging..

No one is "forced" to buy anything where I live.. Even gas.. If I don't want to pay that much I have quite a few alternatives including simply not driving as much.. Am I thrilled with the price?? Not really.. Am I going to throw a fit over it?? Nope.. There are other products with FAR more profit built in to them (bottled water) than gasoline or fuel oil..

And before you start thinking I'm some rich guy, I grew up on the poor side of town and have had a job since I was 12..

__________________
Steve : Animal Charms Animal Jewelry | Fishing Blog
I'm smelling a whole lot of if coming off of this plan.

[QUOTE=Feydakin;355261]No one is "forced" to buy anything where I live.. Even gas.. If I don't want to pay that much I have quite a few alternatives including simply not driving as much.. /QUOTE]

Short sighted ? How much you choose to drive isn't the important part of the gas-price rip-off. The cost of EVERYTHING which needs transportation is affected by it. Food, medicine, clothing, heating, everything available in your shops and hospitals. In fact there's not much which is unaffected by it.

But of course, you're not FORCED to buy any of that stuff. You could choose to die, instead. (Thousands die every day, because they can't afford the transportation costs of basic food and water - must be a cultural thing).

You're right. No-one's forcing them, are they ? It's all moral, isn't it ? What are you smoking ? (I want some).

What things are worth in a capitalist market has to do with how much people are willing to pay for the product or service. How do you establish value, if not by what the market will bear? Arbitrarily?

I like capitalism. Of course, I grew up with it (cultural thing ) but it seems like a fairly democratic system to me.

People starve in all sorts of cultures; I am not sure that has to do with economics, but more to do with how a society cares for those who are less educated, unhealthy or otherwise unable to care for themselves. Now, we are talking morality, but not economics.

__________________
M.-J. Taylor
SEO Web Design by Cyber Key Search Smart Design® SEO Copywriter & Traveling Vacation Gypsy

If it's immoral to charge too much for any product, is it equally immoral to charge too little??

__________________
Steve : Animal Charms Animal Jewelry | Fishing Blog
I'm smelling a whole lot of if coming off of this plan.

It can be, if, for example, you're selling prime building land to a politician.

MJTaylor wrote: "I like capitalism. Of course, I grew up with it (cultural thing ) but it seems like a fairly democratic system to me".

I completely agree. It's the abuse of capitalism, allowing essential commodities to have obscenely inflated prices, which is immoral. This is why there are so many laws against price-fixing, cartels, monopolies, etc. and the reason I mentioned the bloated gas prices, and their murderous effect. There are many other examples, but few which have such disastrous consequences for the world.

What about some mega-corp coming in and selling things at or below cost until the small mom an pop's go out of business and then raising their prices??

__________________
Steve : Animal Charms Animal Jewelry | Fishing Blog
I'm smelling a whole lot of if coming off of this plan.

Does that answer your question ?

So now you agree with me, great!!

Have a fantastic weekend..

__________________
Steve : Animal Charms Animal Jewelry | Fishing Blog
I'm smelling a whole lot of if coming off of this plan.

Uh-huh, and how is capitalism abused? It seems to me that in a democratic society there are redresses for any abuse or injustice.

I am not saying the system is perfect, but it *is* adaptable and finally, accountable to the people.

And just to reiterate: most of us do have more power than we claim. Yes, there are those who are so far below the poverty line that they would appear to be completely impotent, but most of us do have choices far greater than we exercise. We are much quicker to complain than exercise them.

__________________
M.-J. Taylor
SEO Web Design by Cyber Key Search Smart Design® SEO Copywriter & Traveling Vacation Gypsy

"He said the only thing that didn't lie because it simply couldn't was mathematics."

"Reminicences of a Stock Operator". Edwin Lefevere. Page 60 in my edition.


My remarks in blue.

If you start on the ethical road, it will never end and it is time and culture dependent. There are some posts here, too stupid and naiive to comment.

__________________
Mini Network:: Financial information at your fingertips
Learn object oriented programming where it started

Completely wrong. I have stricter rules on my own forum than I have interpreted that they are here. That has nothing to do with ehtics, but with resources and time and server capacity.

__________________
Mini Network:: Financial information at your fingertips
Learn object oriented programming where it started

When asked what he thought of western civilization, Gandhi replied that he thought it would be a good idea.

That's how I feel about open market capitalism. The way it is at the moment, it's a process of bullying and cheating those who have less.

Say what you like, but that's just not moral.

Yes, and it is unethical close to criminal that your market mechanism produce much better bread than us.

I eat bread and not money and gas.

I dear not think of Danish bread under communist command economy.

Is this a mathematical fact? Return to the beginning of my first post.

__________________
Mini Network:: Financial information at your fingertips
Learn object oriented programming where it started

One day you may explain what you're talking about (as usual it makes no sense to me), what you think it has do do with ethics or morals, why you so often feel the need to refer to Denmark (is it some kind of racial or Nationalist fixation you suffer from ?), and where you got the idea that Communism has anything to do with what I'm saying (which is about the ethics and morals of capitalism).

As I see it, there has never been a Communist government, or a Democratic one. They are just borrowed names which politicians glue onto their particular brand of corruption, and nothing to do with what the words actually mean.

It is interesting that so large a part of imports to so-called Democracies come from the so-called Communist ones, or dictatorships (where products are cheap because people can't demand decent wages). Quite telling, isn't it ? (Ethical ? Moral ?)

You may not eat money, but I doubt that you obtain your bread through a barter system.

I actually get quite a few things under the barter system, including eggs to make bread with

In a system where maximum profit is decided by an outside source the product always suffers.. If you tell a baker he can only make $.50 on a loaf of bread, to be fair, he may decided that that isn't enough profit to justify making bread any longer, or he may choose to no longer make high quality bread and instead choose to lower the quality of the ingredients to return him to what he feels is a fair profit for his labor..

The issue I have is when someone outside of the transaction comes in and tells the people involved what they can buy and sell things for.. What gives them the right to interfere?? And we are not talking basic services here, we are talking about normal products that "no one" "needs".. It always seems that these discussions run straight for basic services since that the easiest way one side to try to show evil intent.. What if we limit the discussion to PS3s, or yachts, or private airplanes?? Would you still want to dictate the profit level someone is allowed to make on a product or would you opinion change??

__________________
Steve : Animal Charms Animal Jewelry | Fishing Blog
I'm smelling a whole lot of if coming off of this plan.

You even continue your polemics in other threads, may be in the hope that I don't read. And I think I will not, so you are free to continue. With your democratic attitude, you could continue in that thread, so I get an email message and am able to comment in case you should write anything meaningful. Thehappysmoker is it ethical to continue a discussion in another thread?

My post was a remark to how meaningless your posts are. As usual, you are not able to see the humor in that post.

As usual you mix economics, moral and politics into a sausage. I have mostly stopped to comment your posts.

If I need to read about ethics in economics, there is an enormous litterature from the classics to this day.

There is a related enormous litterature on utility.

Don't believe everything you read on Wikipedia. Don't believe everything you read on forums. You fill WPW servers with nonsense.


Carl Marx writes about an ideal utopia. You will never find that utopia. The only thing you can hope of is improving a system that will never be perfect.

__________________
Mini Network:: Financial information at your fingertips
Learn object oriented programming where it started

"What is unethical to you? "

Sorry you don't understand that this is the question I was answering. Let me know what you DO understand, but try to do so in a way I can understand.

Is it ethical to restrict where a particular subject can be discussed ? (One thread, and one thread only ?)

Your comment about the Communist Utopia seems to confirm what I wrote. Is it more meaningful from you ?

More precisely:

Thehappysmoker is it ethical to continue a polemic in another thread that may be hidden to the person that started that other thread? Not a big point since what you wrote was mostly what some Danish people call air gas. I had thought of not reading this infinite loop thread.

See my comments in blue to the original post. That is my contributon to this infinite loop thread.

Of course not, but you know what I explain above. Here

http://www.webproworld.com/breakroom...tml#post340506

is that thread for anybody to judge by themself.

__________________
Mini Network:: Financial information at your fingertips
Learn object oriented programming where it started

1. Stealing content or whole pages. Nothing to do with ethics at all. It is criminal. If you are a gipsy, it is only criminal if you steal from a family member.
2. Stealing titles and/or descriptions. Nothing to do with ethics at all. It is regarded as SEO and art if it is unreckognizable. Unless it is bad copying. How many of this forum's members cite source? There is one advantage with digital media and books. You can link to the source. That is transclusion. Look the concept up on Wikipedia and Google it.
3. Hot linking to other sites without approval. Depends.
4. Submitting other peoples web site to search engines or anywhere for that matter. Vasting your time. It is not important today.
5. People of power on forums or any other type of site with their personal URL in there sig SOLELY for advertising and back links to there own site. Where do you come from?
6. Having other people dictate to me how I can or can not make money from my own site. "as long as it is legal" How old are you?
7. pop ups or adverts of pron on any site without a adult content warning first. Have you heard of Google safe search and filters. How old are you?
8. Trap pages "any page that once your on, you can not hit the back button to leave. it just reloads that page" Never visit that page again or block the IP. It can be criminal if it infects your Pc. You get a problem if you try to prove it.
9. Using other pages like forums, blogs, Usenet etc to spam your url. "if that is the ONLY reason your there, joined, or post" One single post can be of value to me as a link collector. Most often it is not.
10. knowingly promoting anything illegal. Links to illegal site is not considered illegal.




Kgun I don't know why you feel the need to personally attack me or to belittle me, but I find your comments unprofessional and no I am not going to stoop to your level of intelligence or personality and give you any sort of satisfaction in any sort of come back. I am not going to try to clarify what I was saying, because I am wasting my time in trying to do so. But I do believe you have a serious flaw in your character and maybe before you make any more posts, you consider the wording of it. Have a nice day.

I agree. I find him very offensive, but then, he probably feels the same way about me, and anyone else who points out his faults. I sometimes suspect that he is just a rude drunk (I'm quite prepared to stoop to his insulting level, 'though not to the extent of belittling race or nationality. That's too far out, even for me).

A couple of points which I have been pondering as a result of this thread.
(1) Is it possible for something which is unethical in one country to be ethical in a different one ? I personally don't see how, but I'd be willing to accept it as a theoretical possibility, if someone could provide some kind of evidence.
(2) Does the fact that some people die of poverty in other cultures make it ethical to contribute to their deaths in the name of huge profits ?
(3) Are loss-leaders ethical ? Is it unethical to go to a store with the express intention of only buying the loss-leader and nothing else ?

Feydakin wrote: "I actually get quite a few things under the barter system, including eggs to make bread with " - French toast perhaps ?



BTW: Despite inferences made here, I am not a Communist, and Denmark is not a Communist country. As I mentioned, I don't believe that Communism or Democracy are possibilities in the real world. Unethical behavior is unethical, regardless of political leanings or labels.

But then he'd be making more than the $.50, wouldn't he ? In fact, if he was only allowed to make $.50 on a loaf, he'd probably have to use more expensive ingredients in order to keep his profit down to that level. (He may even start using eggs, 'though I've no idea why he would do such a thing).

Of course, the logical solution would be to lower the price, which is probably what you had in mind when you suggested this $.50 limit to his profit.